www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Question for Orthodox

Fr. Anthony,

Christ is in our midst!

Tbe clergy guidelines of the OCA [aggreen.net] (my jurisidiction) states no such thing. All converts from the RC church are to be received by chrismation. Additionally, at least as far as the GOA Metropolis of Pittsburgh is concerned, His Eminence, Met. Maximos, in an encyclical [pittsburgh.goarch.org] dated 5-19-97 directs that all converts from the RC church be chrismated.

Additionally, marriages outside of the Orthodox Church are not recognized [aggreen.net] by the OCA. The guidelines specifically state

Those who are married in a RC ceremony must come to confession and have their marriage blessed in a rite approved by the bishop before they can be restored to communion.

You may be referring to a recommendation made by the Catholic-Orthodox joint commission. This was only a recommendation and was not an authoritative decision.

Regarding reordination, to my knowledge it is only the Russian tradition that uses vesting as a means of receiving Roman Catholic clergy, which would include the OCA. But, in fact, the ethnic dioceses in the OCA may not practice this. There is no specific policy on the reordination of former Roman Catholic clergy of which I am aware. I may be wrong, but I believe the Greek Orthodox churches reordains former Roman Catholic clergy. If you have any specific citations to the contrary, please let me know. I do acknowledge, as I did previously, that there are differing traditions in this practice.

In Christ,

Priest Thomas

John, considering in places in the ECUSA it is becoming increasingly frequent to see open communion practiced (meaning communing the unbaptized, not just the unconfirmed), I think it's safe to say their practice is probably not one the Orthodox or Catholics would want to use as an example to follow.

Recently? Mormon baptisms have never been Trinitarian. Has the Catholic Church received Mormon converts by means other than baptism in the past?

It's actually also changes to the Trinitarian formula in some mainline denominations that I believe is leading to the re-examiniation in some jurisdictions of the past practice of receiving converts from them by Chrismation as a blanket policy.

That is a matter of debate I suppose.

duplicate.

Father Thomas,

I suggest you check with some of your brethren concerning the church the divorce directives I mentioned earlier. I believe this was the actual directive of Archbishop Peter of NY & NJ. I can even cite the parishes were the divorce required, and the sacramental union was by the RCC. If it is not a sacramental union, why does it need a church court to absolve it? The above citation of instances were done in the last three years. I know because the priests involved were complaining about the costs of the court that had to be collected concerning the divorce.

The reception required by Met. Maximos, is in accordance for his clergy. In the Archdiocesan district, if cases of question, we refer to the chancellor's office for direction. I have not had to make such a request. But I refer to my previous post regarding the cases of reception of clergy.

Actually, we can argue the point until the cows come home, but we must admit, that application of standards is not always evenly applied. My godfather, who is a priest along with his family, was received by confession and he was also recieved as a priest by vesting only. This was not done by either of our respective jurisdictions. I also remember reading within the past year or so, on the official section of the OCA, of certain clergy being vested. I know this has been done by Johntown for a while now.

Well, you have to please excuse me, but I am swamped with work this AM. I will be off until Monday.

In XC,
Father Anthony+

Father Anthony,

Christ is in our midst!

I think when those from outside the faith ask us for the official position of the church, it is not helpful to cite annecdotal evidence (this bishop did this once; I saw that at a particular time; etc.). I cited for all to see the official policies of the OCA, and at least one Greek Orthodox bishop regarding the reception of converts. I also know of instances where the policies were relaxed or changed, depending on the circumstances, but not as a hard and fast rule.

Let us be clear. The overwhelming practice of the Orthodox church is to receive RC converts by chrismation. Some even rebaptize, although this is strictly forbidden in the OCA and I suppose, in the GOA. In the OCA marriages peformed outside the church must be blessed before eucharistic communion is restored, and there is a mixed policy of reordination of RC clergy who enter the faith.

Priest Thomas

Fr. Thomas, He is and always will be!

Agreed. BTW, please check the time of my post on that reply. It was in the middle of the night, so I may have been my best.
Wishing you peace and a good feast!

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+

Hello Fr. Anthony,

Father, Bless!

Thanks again for your heartfelt charitable post. All the more reason for me to try harder to use more kinder words to express myself properly.

You are right, both sides are far behind on news. I hope and pray that the priests continue to learn, grow and be educated.

What do you think about both sides start sending each other Diocesan/Eparchial Newspapers or Newsletters? I think it's a good way to keep up with the news.

I think the Greek Orthodox Church of America do a GREAT job of posting news about the other side (Catholic side). And I also think the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Eparchy of St. Nicholas do a great job of posting news about the other side (Orthodox). (because I receive both newspapers) That is just a tip of an iceberg.

I would think it'd be better to have each other's newspapers in our mailbox so we can read it and keep up with the pace of each other's Churches. Don't you think?

Perhaps the Society of St. John Chrysosom (I can NEVER spell that name correctly! ) could raise some funds specifically to pay at each respective newspapers to be distributed (for example, pay Greek Orthodox money to print out and mail out newspapers to each priests of the Roman and Byzantine Church and pay Roman Catholic and Byzantine Catholic Dioceses for printing and mailing out to each priests of the Orthodox Church? Maybe that would be a good idea to start with??? Just an idea.

I mean, I know that everybody can read news very easily on the internet. But do they do it? Do they REMEMBER to do it? It's hard to remember to sit down and look for something on the internet. Sometimes after a long day's of work, the priests can get tired and not feeling up to sitting on a hard chair in front of the computer desk. Probably most of them would opt for soft comfy couches, so that would be a good place to read newspapers.

So maybe mailing out and it'll land on their desk right at their face would help them open up the pages easily and read them.


I totally agree with you about many rabid anti-Catholic Protestant converts to Orthodoxy. I have the same concerns for Protestant coverts to Catholicism how they think Orthodoxy is all wrong and having very UNHEALTHY view on Papacy (how they delight on Supremacy of the Pope as oppose to the true genuine Primacy of Peter).

It's true that the cradles on both sides can be more lax than the converts. Perhaps we should see the zeal of the converts to revitalize the cradle's eagerness of our faith? Also perhaps the cradles can kindly remind the converts to RESPECT the cradles more, it's the cradles that kept the Church in existence whether he/she is lax or not.

It's not only the Orthodox converts that's a problem, it's also a problem with the Catholic converts that I deal with.

How can somebody like me say something about this? HOW? What is the best way? Contact the Catholic bishop about the overzealous of the converts? What? I mean, it's a real problem. I can hinder the growth of the Church. It can hinder the Catholic-Orthodox relations. It can even hinder the faith of each respective Churches?


Comment to others:

I wanted to say something about re-chrismation of the Orthodox Church. First of all, the reason the Catholic Church does not re-Christmate (re-Confirm) people joining in from the Orthodox because I think from their POV the Chrismation in the Orthodox Church is already done. It's the WORK of the Holy Spirit, so nevertheless the RC does not question it's validility because it's G-d the Holy Spirit who made it valid.

I personally don't understand the need of re-chrismation to Catholics joining the Orthodox Church. Maybe their perspective is a little different? From RC's POV, re-Chrismating is saying that the Holy Spirit wasn't good enough. So in some ways that can be very insulting in someone's views. It's like the Orthodox was questioning the validility of the Holy Spirit in Confirmation (Chrismation)???

Perhaps the Orthodox can explain the real reason why? Maybe it's just a symbolic sign of joining the Orthodox Church? I don't know.

That's the reason we have a forum to explain things and be educated.

One can say a glass is half empty and another say it's half full. Neither are wrong, both are correct. So we'll have to constantly keep that analogy in mind at all times when we are in Catholic-Orthodox dialogue. We have to realize that both of us are CORRECT!!! Neither one of us are wrong and are in error. We have to stop saying "NO, you're wrong, it's half full" when we can say "Yes, I see it's half full, but you are right, it's also half empty".

Thanks again, to those who remind me more about Christian love and charity especialy from Alice, Fr. Anthony and Rilian. Thanks again.

SPDundas
Deaf Byzantine

Dear SPDundas you said:

"Perhaps the Society of St. John Chrysosom (I can NEVER spell that name correctly!"

I say:

Think of the Greek word for golden mouth. "Chryso" means gold and 'stoma' means mouth...and what do we have? Chrysostom! Well I think that's correct...at least that's how I spell it. I'm a pretty bad speller you know.

In Christ,

Zenovia

The sacrament of chrismation, given to one who converts, is not given only as a symbolic act (unless we mean symbol in the way Fr. Schememann taught it). No, the Chrismation is given as it is always given - "The Seal of the Gift of the Holy Spirit." In all His fulness and power.

Priest Thomas

for the record: for a number of years in my youth, before returning to historical orthodox Christianity, I was a member of the LDS (Mormon) Church. the baptismal formula goes like this:"Having been comissioned by Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost", therefore, you have at least a prima facie Trinitatarian formula as far as Baptism goes. I was baptized in this formula, and as a seventeen year old Priest, I used this formula when I baptized a friend of mine who was joing the LDS Church. Until recently, LDS baptism was accepted by Rome for an LDS converting to Catholicism, the issue is that if you examine LDS doctrine, their idea of the Trinity, and that of historical orthodox Christianity (Catholic, Protestant, Anglican, Orthodox, etc. ) don't jibe, thus LDS baptism is invalid, period.
Much Love,
Jonn

The Illuminator, an official publication of the Pittsburgh Diocese of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America, published this in response to a question from a reader about Baptism.:

1) The Orthodox Church receives "all those baptized in the Holy Trinity and correctly professing faith in the Holy Trinity." Faithful from the "Oriental Orthodox Churches...are accepted by profession of faith only."

2) Those coming from confessions which "profess faith in the Holy Trinity but who do not have a true sacrament of confirmation (or Chrismation), as they do not have true (�valid�) priesthood, are accepted by Chrismation."

3) "To treat Trinitarian Christians as unbaptized heathens is an injustice committed against Christian baptism, and eventually a blasphemy against God�s Holy Spirit Who is at work at any Christian baptism."

4) "When we confess faith in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins, we do not mean by that Orthodox baptism, but any Christian baptism." The Holy Spirit is not "limited by human canonical boundaries we have established for our convenience. We cannot bind the spirit, and not allow Him to work with all the other Christians, just because some of us so decided."

5) "The Eighth Ecumenical Council restored the unity between the Eastern and Western Churches. The representatives of both Churches had agreed that the Roman primacy has to be exercised in the �West�...and the primacy of the Church of Constantinople had to continue to function within its own territory of the East....

"Also, regarding the Filioque clause (the procession of the Spirit and from the Son) was rejected by that Council as unauthentic and erroneous.

"The problem with the West is that later it alienated itself from the teaching and authority of this Eighth Council.

"Obviously, when the West will return to the teaching of this commonly accepted Council by both East and West, Rome and Constantinople alike, the �Western,� Roman Catholic Church will basically become Orthodox again."

6) The Orthodox Church "has never formally rejected the Roman Church as a Christian Church, as some of our fanatics may believe. True, a contemporary rejection of the Roman baptism by the Great Church of Constantinople for pastoral reasons has taken place. But this was corrected and readdressed, as soon as the cause of this rejection disappeared.

"Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, the two �sister churches� of old continue to recognize one another�s baptism, as well as the other sacraments celebrated in these churches."

7) The rebaptism by Orthodox of baptized heterodox Christians is inspired by "narrow-mindedness, fanaticism and bigotry."

Please note this was cited from an article by the The Orthodox Chrsitian Information Center criticizing the Ilumminator's article for its stance.

Dear Father Deacon Lance,

Thank you for that informative post!

So, does this mean that:

a) Orthodoxy recognizes the 8th Council as truly "Ecumenical?"

b) Whether or not Baptism is done by trine immersion or by "sprinkling" is of no consequence to the validity of the Mystery/Sacrament?

The Russian Orthodox would even baptize Ukrainian and Belarusyan Orthodox by trine immersion, if they were baptized by pouring, as became the custom in the Kyivan Orthodox Metropolia during the Baroque period.

Alex

In this case, the quote that Deacon Lance gives is from a secondary source (the Orthodox Information Center). I would suggest that the citation be given for this article from "The Illuminator." Also, if it was in fact written, it may be one writer's opinion, and not expressing the policy of the Ecumenical Patriarchate or the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

Priest Thomas

Fr. Thomas,

I came across that article by accident and only posted it since people had asked for verification of Fr. Anthony's statments. I don't have that issue of the Illuminator and the GOA Pittsbugh Diocese's website only goes back to 12/2002. They only publish 3 times a year so it should not be difficult to locate if anyone out their keeps all their back issues. However, it appears the OCIF article is citing an "Our Reader Ask..." column from the Illuminator which is answered by Metropolitan Maximos.

Fr. Deacon Lance

The document BAPTISM AND "SACRAMENTAL ECONO...atholic Theological Consultation - 1999 might be of interest to those following this discussion.